Brits dont turn up to famine ceremony

Fink Goddie

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/british-fail-to-attend-famine-ceremony-2182551.html

Bad form really is'nt it!

Manach

Not really. In that the event occured about 170 years ago, and if they had to attend ceromonies in every country which had a famine in their former empire then their diplomatic corps. would have a resource issue.

mike65

Meh they apologised already.

super_furry

Wow, the Independent is some rag. They actually call them 'Brits' in the article.

Fink Goddie

Manach wrote: »

Not really. In that the event occured about 170 years ago, and if they had to attend ceromonies in every country which had a famine in their former empire then their diplomatic corps. would have a resource issue.

Well we're only across the water, wouldnt be that much to ask

dlofnep

In fairness - it wouldn't have done them any harm to send someone over. You can be sure that they have someone representing them for Holocaust memorials, even though they had nothing to do with it. If they don't want to attend a memorial for the deaths of over a million people, which died under their rule - then that says more about them than the Indo ever could.

Zapho

super_furry wrote: »

Wow, the Independent is some rag. They actually call them 'Brits' in the article.

+1, awful stuff altogether.

Carlos_Ray

Originally Posted by super_furry
Wow, the Independent is some rag. They actually call them 'Brits' in the article.

Zapho wrote: »

+1, awful stuff altogether.

I find it hilarious that you're more perturbed by the independent using the term "Brits" then you are by the real issue. Its this type of mentality that has Ireland in the pits.

Lets get our priorities straight here. The British Government disrespected the Irish people by not attending this. Thats the reality of this situation.

There is no excuse for this type of behaviour, however, I fear we'll see more if it from the British Conservative Government.

Don't drag this thread into the normal "Irish verus British" argument. Judge the incident on its own merits.

Should a neigbouring country send a representative to a memorial event, in order to show respect for a MAJOR tragedy?? Yes of course, its basic diplomacy (and manners). They should be ashamed.

getz

Fink Goddie wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/british-fail-to-attend-famine-ceremony-2182551.html

Bad form really is'nt it!

i feel that they would have been in a no win situation,dont go condemned,do go and condemned and people would have protested,did they hold a famine ceremony in the north ?

mike65

The equivalent of the Indo (Mail?) talked of Micks/Paddies in a news report every two bit Irish pressure group would be down on them like a tonne of bricks.

dlofnep

mike65 wrote: »

The equivalent of the Indo (Mail?) talked of Micks/Paddies in a news report every two bit Irish pressure group would be down on them like a tonne of bricks.

Mike, you're right. But that's nothing new for the Indo. They aren't exactly politically correct. I hope you see the bigger picture here however - Failure to attend by a British representative is disrespectful IMO. If you don't feel so - that's fine. But many people would raise their eyebrows. 60 million people or so live in Britain - They can't find one person to go?

Carlos_Ray

mike65 wrote: »

The equivalent of the Indo (Mail?) talked of Micks/Paddies in a news report every two bit Irish pressure group would be down on them like a tonne of bricks.

No its not. Its nothing like that. Mick/Paddies were racist names used to demean the Irish and udnermine their credibility. Perpetuate discrimination and reduce their ability to gain employment in Britain.

"Brits" on the other hand is a term that is actually used quite commonly in the British media. It's not considered a derogatory term. Its actually used quite like the term "Dubs." Most Dubliners use the term themselves, likewise, a lot of British use the term "Brits".

Congratulations though, you have successfully managed to divert peoples attention away from yet another genuine Irish grievance, with pointless "whataboutery."

Thats why this country is weak. For every person we have who is willing to stand up for what is right, we have 2 people (with inferiority complexes) who are ready to put the boot in.

Cavehill Red

Given that there wasn't a famine to commemorate, I don't see why the Brits would want to be there.
Equally, I doubt they'd be in a hurry to attend an Irish genocide commemoration, which is what we should really be holding.

mike65

Carlos_Ray, when an Irishman use the terms Brits its with an undercurrent of hostility as in BRITS OUT! etc.

Denerick

Oh yes, commemoration services. On the one hand they are pursued to prevent Republicans and political extremists hopping on the bandwagon. On the other hand they are a pathetic display of dilletantism in order for the average bourgeouis family to feel better about themselves and give themselves that self congratulatory pat on the back for 'honouring our heritage'. It always annoyes me how people work themselves into a tissy over a bloody ceremony. If you really want to honour the dead, stop putting their souls through this annual torment of the self righteous, easily offendable brigade.

prinz

No one attended, not even from the embassy? Extremely bad form IMO.

Poly

The British ambassador has agreed to buy everyone chips as a form of reconciliation.

Carlos_Ray

mike65 wrote: »

Carlos_Ray, when an Irishman use the terms Brits its with an undercurrent of hostility as in BRITS OUT! etc.

Some Irishmen use it in a hostile context. Some Irishmen use "immigrant" in a hostile context too. That doesn't make the word itself taboo.

The word Paddy/Mick used in reference to the Irish, is legally considered discrimination. Thats not my opinion. Thats Law, as you can see by the various successful lawsuits in Britain.

If you want to find a similar taboo word for the British, It would be something along the lines of "Limey."

Besides, this is a total and pointless digression. The fact is the British should have done the decent thing and send a representative ( a lowly civil servant would have sufficed). In the context of the on-going peace process attendance should have been a "no-brainer." It was poor form.

Peyton Manning

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Lets get our priorities straight here. The British Government disrespected the Irish people by not attending this. Thats the reality of this situation.[/B]

No they haven't. Im Irish and I don't feel one bit disrespected. I couldn't give a toss actually.

dlofnep

Archimedes wrote: »

No they haven't. Im Irish and I don't feel one bit disrespected. I couldn't give a toss actually.

Sorry - that is how you feel. It's not how everybody feels.

Fighting Irish

Who gives a fook?
**** happened, it's over now

Peyton Manning

dlofnep wrote: »

Sorry - that is how you feel. It's not how everybody feels.

Right. It's how I feel. So I was right in pointing out that the Irish people haven't been disrespected. Only some of them have, i.e. those who would get upset over something like this.

jimi_t2

super_furry wrote: »

Wow, the Independent is some rag. They actually call them 'Brits' in the article.

Not only that, but given how concerned they are about the ''Brits'' disrespecting this sacred ceremony, look at the ****ing photo they decided to run with, captioned with ''The wind plays a trick on Archbishop Neary''.



And you have to go searching for a wonderfully evocative and touching photo of wreaths being laid at the memorial in Mayo by the appropriate Minister.



They haven't a leg to stand on, the morally bankrupt ****ers. The so called Irish Independent has disgraced us. Again.
At least the Red Tops don't pretend to be a legitimate and unbiased source of news.

dlofnep

Archimedes wrote: »

Right. It's how I feel. So I was right in pointing out that the Irish people haven't been disrespected. Only some of them have, i.e. those who would get upset over something like this.

Well - the fact that they didn't show the courtesy by sending a public rep, when Nigeria and Slovenia did says a whole lot about what they think about Ireland.

I'm not upset btw - I'm not bothered either way. But it is disrespectful to the nation.

prinz

dlofnep wrote: »

Sorry - that is how you feel. It's not how everybody feels.

In that case the original poster should have said 'I feel the British government disrespected me..'. I don't feel any more disrespected by the British than I do by the President and Taoiseach only sending aides.

I don't feel disrespected, but I do feel the British embassy at least have really shown themselves up badly in diplomatic circles. They probably asked if the President or Taoiseach were going to be attending.. and then thought to themselves 'it must not be that big a deal so....'

Peyton Manning

dlofnep wrote: »

Well - the fact that they didn't show the courtesy by sending a public rep, when Nigeria and Slovenia did says a whole lot about what they think about Ireland.

I'm not upset btw - I'm not bothered either way. But it is disrespectful to the nation.

Fair enough. I guess we disagree. For what it's worth, I would consider myself to have fairly strong republican views on topics like this, but I really think this is a non issue, as in I doubt they set out to intentionally not acknowledge the event. (that sentence has been very poorly constructed, but you know what I mean! )

dlofnep

Archimedes wrote: »

Fair enough. I guess we disagree. For what it's worth, I would consider myself to have fairly strong republican views on topics like this, but I really think this is a non issue, as in I doubt they set out to intentionally not acknowledge the event. (that sentence has been very poorly constructed, but you know what I mean! )

It is really a non-issue. You're right. But while it's being discussed - I just gave my views on it. If we can have reps from 14 other nations, then our closest neighbours could have sent someone. Poor showing, that's all.

jimi_t2

dlofnep wrote: »

Well - the fact that they didn't show the courtesy by sending a public rep, when Nigeria and Slovenia did says a whole lot about what they think about Ireland.

Hmmm...

Fair enough that the US and Australia sent an ambassador (more Irish passports in the US then Ireland, lot of anti-Irish sentiment in Oz atm), and Ireland maintains excellent relations with China - especially in the Education sector - and goes to lengths to promote Asian culture and provide support for the thousands of students and ex-pats working here.

Some of the other countries put somewhat of a wry smile on my face however. Can you guess why?

Eliot Rosewater

jimi_t2 wrote: »

Some of the other countries put somewhat of a wry smile on my face however. Can you guess why?

Is it because there's always famines in Africa? Do I win, do I win?

Carlos_Ray

Archimedes wrote: »

No they haven't. Im Irish and I don't feel one bit disrespected. I couldn't give a toss actually.

Oh come on now. Diplomacy dictates protocols, and it is fairly obvious that you should send a representative to your neigboruing country if they are commemorating a tragedy. Of course many Irish ( like you) don't care and aren't offended. Nevertheless as an entity, as a state, Ireland has been disrespected.

prinz

jimi_t2 wrote: »

Some of the other countries put somewhat of a wry smile on my face however. Can you guess why?

Victims of oppression from a big bad neighbour.

getz

services held for the famine victims were held across the UK,liverpool-st lukes church, cardiff -cathays cemetery,carfin[motherwell] at the celtic cross memorial,

The Corinthian

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

"Brits" on the other hand is a term that is actually used quite commonly in the British media. It's not considered a derogatory term. Its actually used quite like the term "Dubs." Most Dubliners use the term themselves, likewise, a lot of British use the term "Brits".

I actually know quite a few who consider it quite insulting. Not being British myself, I can't say, but I get the impression that it falls into one of those categories like Ni**er - OK for them to use it, but no one else.

Thats why this country is weak. For every person we have who is willing to stand up for what is right, we have 2 people (with inferiority complexes) who are ready to put the boot in.

And there was I thinking that our main failing is a need to perpetuate a myth that we are victims so as to explain our own social and economic shortcomings as being ultimately due to 800 years of oppression, the Catholic Church, Fianna Fail, etc.

Still, if keeping the Famine alive makes half as much money as the Holocaust, I reckon we're on a winner.

congress3

The Corinthian wrote: »

I actually know quite a few who consider it quite insulting. Not being British myself, I can't say, but I get the impression that it falls into one of those categories like Ni**er - OK for them to use it, but no one else.

A ludicrous and stupid comparison you made there to be honest.

The Corinthian

congress3 wrote: »

A ludicrous and stupid comparison you made there to be honest.

As I said, I've known more than one who does find it offensive. And when said amongst themselves it certainly does not have the negative connotations that it has when said by an Irishman. So while I certainly would not say that the terms are used in the same way, I do think who says it appears to matter.

Now, if you'd like to counter than with something a little more robust than "ludicrous and stupid comparison" I am more than happy to listen.

Carlos_Ray

The Corinthian wrote: »

I actually know quite a few who consider it quite insulting. Not being British myself, I can't say, but I get the impression that it falls into one of those categories like Ni**er - OK for them to use it, but no one else. .

You cannot be serious. Ni**ger is considered offensive because like paddy/Mick, it was used to demean an already powerless group of persecuted people. Are you trying to say that the British suffered as much victimisation as these two groups??? Get real. I don't remember any signs that read "No Blacks, No dogs, No Irish, and No Brits." Your attempting to re-write history (like many people on these boards) and portray the British as the victims or at least equal victims..:rolleyes:

The Corinthian wrote: »

And there was I thinking that our main failing is a need to perpetuate a myth that we are victims so as to explain our own social and economic shortcomings as being ultimately due to 800 years of oppression, the Catholic Church, Fianna Fail, etc.

Still, if keeping the Famine alive makes half as much money as the Holocaust, I reckon we're on a winner.

"Perpetuate a myth" :rolleyes: here we go again, don't let a little thing called historic fact get in the way of your moralising and pandering.

Our main failing was anytime someone stood up for what was right they were betrayed by their own countrymen.

The 1916 rebels were spat on in Dublin.

People who spoke out against the church, were alienated from their communites (some were even locked up in asylums).

Those who highlighted Government corruption were harrassed no end by people. The journalist who uncovered the crimes of Fianna Fails own "rambo" was run out of the country.

Even the current protestors who tried to storm into the Dail were mocked on these very boards.

The Greeks had it right when they said ," we're not like the Irish we'll fight back."

I love my country, but I hate the amount of spinless people that live here.

PS I find your Holocaust remark a little bit tasteless.

The Corinthian

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

You cannot be serious. Ni**ger is considered offensive because like paddy/Mick, it was used to demean an already powerless group of persecuted people. Are you trying to say that the British suffered as much victimisation as these two groups??? Get real. I don't remember any signs that read "No Blacks, No dogs, No Irish, and No Brits." Your attempting to re-write history (like many people on these boards) and portray the British as the victims or at least equal victims..:rolleyes:

Please read my previous post.

"Perpetuate a myth" :rolleyes: here we go again, don't let a little thing called historic fact get in the way of your moralising and pandering.

Indeed - you'll note the key word in my statement; "are".

Those who suffered as a result of the famine were victims, but we are not, and I have heard enough excuses over the years about how Ireland's problems are all down to [INSERT SCAPEGOAT] to realize that such a culture of victimization serves only to hinder us, not help us.

Our main failing was anytime someone stood up for what was right they were betrayed by their own countrymen.

Which is kind of what I've said, TBH. We elected the government. We kept quiet about clerical abuse. We ran this country like a third world pseudo-socialist, insular banana republic for the first 70 years of its existence. And we did all that by blaming others, when we should have blamed ourselves.

I love my country, but I hate the amount of spinless people that live here.

Maybe I'm standing up for what I think is right - or is your 'right' the only one we are allowed to stand up for?

PS I find your Holocaust remark a little bit tasteless.

I find the manner in which the Famine has been marketed in recent years as 'our own Holocaust' and exploited for profit a bit tasteless too.

Denerick

"Perpetuate a myth" here we go again, don't let a little thing called historic fact get in the way of your moralising and pandering.

Our main failing was anytime someone stood up for what was right they were betrayed by their own countrymen.

I have no time for people who stand up for their interpretation of what is 'right', against the will of the majority of the people.

The 1916 rebels were spat on in Dublin.

Around 1,500 men and women 'rose up' at a time when thousands of families had relatives serving with the British Army at the height of World War I. The rebels were responsible for the destruction of much of inner city Dublin and the deaths of hundreds of civilians. Were I alive in 1916, I would have spat on these elitist clowns as well.

Even the current protestors who tried to storm into the Dail were mocked on these very boards.

Yes, because they are unrepresentative (Mainly Trotskyites, anarchists and anti capitalists) and almost Pythonesque in their ridiculousness.

The Greeks had it right when they said ," we're not like the Irish we'll fight back."

The Greek people are deluded if they think they can get bailed out by a country whose citizens have to retire at 67 while they can retire in their 50s.

I love my country, but I hate the amount of spinless people that live here.

I love my country, but I hate the amount of bandwagoning and general moaning that goes on among people who have never stopped to reflect on how ridiculous and ludicrous they look when they wave that anarchist banner in the air and demand -from the state- to maintain current levels of public spending.

Please, read at least one economic article that explains the current ****house we're in. And less of this unthinking claptrap.

Carlos_Ray

The Corinthian wrote: »

Please read my previous post.

Indeed - you'll note the key word in my statement; "are".

Those who suffered as a result of the famine were victims, but we are not, and I have heard enough excuses over the years about how Ireland's problems are all down to [INSERT SCAPEGOAT] to realize that such a culture of victimization serves only to hinder us, not help us.

I haven't come across one Irish person that blaims Britain on Ireland's current problems. Everybody blames our Government and financial insitutions, so I'm not sure were your getting this idea that we are using the British as scapegoats.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Which is kind of what I've said, TBH. We elected the government. We kept quiet about clerical abuse. We ran this country like a third world pseudo-socialist, insular banana republic for the first 70 years of its existence. And we did all that by blaming others, when we should have blamed ourselves.

Yes thats true. However, the reason this issue was brought up in this thread is because someone decided that the use of the term " Brits" warranted more outrage than the British snub of the ceremony. For me, this is typical of modern day Ireland. Becuase of our past ( which you outline) there is a portion of people who are bascially scared to be critical of Britain. This in strange away is a symptom of our own recent history of victimisation. Its the "aren't we so dreadful" mentality.

More to the point, should the British have sent someone to the ceremony? Of course. What ever about any other issue. In this instance the British were WRONG, not us.

Eliot Rosewater

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

I haven't come across one Irish person that blaims Britain on Ireland's current problems.

I read a comment on the politics forum a while back that claimed Irish people had an oppressed mentality from the famine and that is why we let the banks and the government get away with things.

It's a pity I forget the name of the poster who said; I'd make a conscious effort to ignore their posts in the future.

Carlos_Ray

Denerick wrote: »

I have no time for people who stand up for their interpretation of what is 'right', against the will of the majority of the people.

Really??? do you also hate the members of the anti-nazi movement in Germany throughout the thirties and forties?? God damn those people for standing up against what was the will of the majority. lol

Denerick wrote: »

I Around 1,500 men and women 'rose up' at a time when thousands of families had relatives serving with the British Army at the height of World War I. The rebels were responsible for the destruction of much of inner city Dublin and the deaths of hundreds of civilians. Were I alive in 1916, I would have spat on these elitist clowns as well.

If I was there I like to think I would have supported the rebels. However, I don't think you would have spat in my face. You'd be too busy shining the black and tans boots like a good little "Paddy".

Denerick wrote: »

Yes, because they are unrepresentative (Mainly Trotskyites, anarchists and anti capitalists) and almost Pythonesque in their ridiculousness.

Maybe so. But at least they are active, unlike the thousands of armchair experts that "know exactly what went wrong and how to solve the problem", but prefer to do....nothing at all.

Denerick wrote: »

I love my country, but I hate the amount of bandwagoning and general moaning that goes on among people who have never stopped to reflect on how ridiculous and ludicrous they look when they wave that anarchist banner in the air and demand -from the state- to maintain current levels of public spending.

Please, read at least one economic article that explains the current ****house we're in. And less of this unthinking claptrap.

Thank you so much Denerick. I'm looking forward to you solving this countries problems because evidently you have all the answers (from your years of reading economic articles).

Denerick

Go out and protest. Thank God we have such politically motivated young men like you to cure the nations ills.

The majority of people laugh at 'active' people, because for the most part they are boorish company, with a huge chip on their shoulder, and don't spend a whole lot of time in thought.

The Corinthian

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

I haven't come across one Irish person that blaims Britain on Ireland's current problems. Everybody blames our Government and financial insitutions, so I'm not sure were your getting this idea that we are using the British as scapegoats.

I think you're giving away your age here. Prior to the Celtic Tiger, it was something you would hear with depressing regularity. That Ireland was a borderline second-world economy (heavily reliant on the government sector and almost xenophobically protectionist) was put down to the aforementioned "800 years of oppression". With the Celtic Tiger, that line has become untenable, so we have had to turn to other scapegoats; the Church for social issues and the government (Fianna Fail largely) for economics.

That we repeatedly elected the latter and fed the housing bubble by buying property like shopaholic lemmings is something that we have conveniently forgotten.

Yes thats true. However, the reason this issue was brought up in this thread is because someone decided that the use of the term " Brits" warranted more outrage than the British snub of the ceremony. For me, this is typical of modern day Ireland. Becuase of our past ( which you outline) there is a portion of people who are bascially scared to be critical of Britain. This in strange away is a symptom of our own recent history of victimisation. Its the "aren't we so dreadful" mentality.

I have only ever heard the term 'Brit' from an Irishman in the pejorative, so I can well understand that they don't like being called that by us. I don't think that has anything to do with fear of criticizing Britain, only with not offending another group. Ultimately, it really is not up to us to say what they are offended by - that is the basis of civility even on a one-to-one basis.

More to the point, should the British have sent someone to the ceremony? Of course. What ever about any other issue. In this instance the British were WRONG, not us.

I disagree. This Famine-Holocaust industry is actually stomach churning, serving only to perpetuate this sense of victimization and absolution of responsibility.

Carlos_Ray

The Corinthian wrote: »

I disagree. This Famine-Holocaust industry is actually stomach churning, serving only to perpetuate this sense of victimization and absolution of responsibility.

I understand your point, however, you have to acknowledge that the famine and the Holocaust isn't just about death. Its also about displacement. Millions of Australians/Americans/British are interested in visiting Ireland and doing famine tours so they get an insight into their ancestors realities.

I am of the frame of mind that Irishness is not restricted by borders. This is understandable when you consider many more Irish citizens live outside the country than in it (not to mention Irish communites). These people deserve recognition and ceremonies like this give them recognition. After all many of the Irish forced to leave the country pumped money back into it. Irish-Americans look back at this history with pride, becuase despite the hardships their ancestors achieved great success in the new land.

So I believe we have a duty to respect the event and document it accordingly.

miec

That we repeatedly elected the latter and fed the housing bubble by buying property like shopaholic lemmings is something that we have conveniently forgotten.

Lol, that has to be one of the coolest lines I've ever read , nice line.

Back to the topic at hand, as a person born in the UK of Irish parents, who experienced racism in England (I was a Paddy in the UK) and racism in Ireland (a British bastard in Ireland), I couldn't win either way.

The thing is a newspaper using 'Brits' is using it in a demeaning way. Yes it would have been nice for some politician to have attended but I wonder but how many of the Irish politicians go to memorials in the UK (excluding Northern Ireland) of soldiers and people who were killed by the IRA.

I would have to concur that it is time Ireland lost its victim mentality, it has been holding us back for too long. The passivity amongst many Irish people is scary. We need to be far more proactive in a positive way. Yes we can learn from our history but not rewrite and relive the whole sorry saga. Yes Irish people were wronged, but we have also wronged others.

miec

I am of the frame of mind that Irishness is not restricted by borders. This is understandable when you consider many more Irish citizens live outside the country than in it (not to mention Irish communites). These people deserve recognition and ceremonies like this give them recognition.

I feel that many of these people have a mawkish and over-romanticised view of Ireland that bears little relevance to contemporary Irish life today. Their view of Ireland keeps Irish people and their culture rooted to the past and they have an expectation that many Irish people will conform to this viewpoint. A perspective that I often find insulting.

Zombrex

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

I find it hilarious that you're more perturbed by the independent using the term "Brits" then you are by the real issue. Its this type of mentality that has Ireland in the pits.

Lets get our priorities straight here. The British Government disrespected the Irish people by not attending this. Thats the reality of this situation.

I think the poor state of Irish journalism is a far greater worry than any faux offense people are taking to this.

Does anyone seriously think the British government didn't send someone on purpose to make a point about something?

Lets get our priorities straight indeed, this isn't 170 years ago or even 30 years ago. This continuous need we seem to have, stroked by rags like the Independent, to take offense at what ever Britain is or isn't doing in relation to us just smacks of a massive inferiority complex.

miec

I think the poor state of Irish journalism is a far greater worry than any faux offense people are taking to this.

Does anyone seriously think the British government didn't send someone on purpose to make a point about something?

Lets get our priorities straight indeed, this isn't 170 years ago or even 30 years ago. This continuous need we seem to have, stroked by rags like the Independent, to take offense at what ever Britain is or isn't doing in relation to us just smacks of a massive inferiority complex.

+ 1, well said.

johnnyskeleton

dlofnep wrote: »

In fairness - it wouldn't have done them any harm to send someone over. You can be sure that they have someone representing them for Holocaust memorials, even though they had nothing to do with it. If they don't want to attend a memorial for the deaths of over a million people, which died under their rule - then that says more about them than the Indo ever could.

Well, it has been aruged that they stood idly by:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_bombing_debate

In RE: topic - think of all the hassle about the queen visting Ireland. We don't want their heads of state to come over but then we get upset when they don't.

RIODEJ

Fink Goddie wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/british-fail-to-attend-famine-ceremony-2182551.html

Bad form really is'nt it!

scandalous but not really surprising, shows exactly the sort of people they are

they governed the country at that time, could have helped but didnt.. wouldnt allow european countries like france to help either.. "no, no its ok we can take care of this"

i think they seen it as punishment for the irish fighting against english occupation and the famine weakened the countries ability to beat them, many died and many left so true independence was virtually doomed.. unfortunately..

at the time of the famine, dozens of ships were exporting food from dublin and cork ports, meat, oats the whole works,

british people in general are horrible.. fullstop! irish hate them spanish hate them, french hate them etc etc etc..,

RIODEJ

plus loads of government people attended from other countries, most nothing to do with ireland, some african countries even.. every country has embassies here so its not a big task for 1 person to attend..

its simply just a gesture of diplomatic respect and consideration.